Unfortunately for KC, they have to start someone at QB this week Lard

Good Morning, Broncos fans! The big topic of discussion yesterday at Dove Valley was, of course, the injury to Wilis McGahee and how the Broncos will try to compensate for his loss.

Lance Ball, likely understanding that it's his own strongest suit in the race for McGahee's snaps, says picking up the blitz is the most important task for a Denver running back, while Ronnie Hillman admits he's still got some work to do in that facet of the game.

Knowshon Moreno, who is expected to be activated for the first time since Week 2 at Atlanta, says that not playing has allowed the knee injury which ended his 2011 season to heal completely.

Will McGahee's absence harm the Broncos' ability to rely heavily upon 11 personnel? Unfortunately, the prospects of that being the case are strong to very strong.

The bright side of the injury coin is the growing likelihood the Broncos will have Chris Kuper back in the starting lineup Sunday at Arrowhead.

Broncos

Denver mostly used D.J. Williams in their nickel package alongside Wesley Woodyard on first and second downs Sunday.

Justin Bannan joined Vic Lombardi on CBS4 to discuss his return to Denver, the injury to McGahee, and D.J.'s comeback.

While it's great to see a national writer like Clark Judge present the case for Von Miller as DPOY, but is Von's greatness as unrecognized as Judge makes it out to be? Or is this actually the case, because the Ultimate Teammate™ got all the credit for the Broncos making the playoffs last year, while Miller and the defense were being maligned by Zombies and fiction dealers alike?

Jeff Legwold says that Sunday helped prove there are no easy wins, to which we'll say that of course there aren't, not when you're kicking field goals instead of allowing Peyton Manning to go for touchdowns in short-yardage situations.

Khaled Elsayed suggests Von may be the frontrunner for DPOY and mentions the vast improvement of Zane Beadles; Andrew Mason grades Denver's performance.

AFCW

The Chiefs lost several key players to injury Sunday, and it's unclear that any of them will play against Denver; Romeo Crennel says he's yet to decide whether to feed Matt Cassel, Brady Quinn, or even Ricky Stanzi to the wolves otherwise known as Von, Elvis, and Wesley.

Anyone surprised to learn that neither Cassel nor Quinn is playing well, or that Peyton Hillis had another fumble Sunday (that makes two on just 53 touches)?

San Diego is likewise banged up heading into its game against Baltimore, as Eddie Royal and Larry English left Sunday's game without returning; Kevin Acee considers the Chargers' slim chances and reminds everyone that since Week 2, they've only managed to beat Kansas City; Eddie Brown thinks A.J. Smith's style of running a team wouldn't work in fantasy football, either.

All charges against Raiders LB Rolando McClain have been dropped in his Alabama gun case after McClain's accuser $aid he no longer wanted the ca$e pur$ued.

Trimmings

San Francisco obliterated Chicago 32-7 as Aldon Smith delivered 5.5 sacks and Colin Kaepernick dazzled in his first NFL start and created a blazing QB controversy for the Niners; Jim Harbaugh says he'll "go with the hot hand" going forward, although he also says that both Kaepernick and Alex Smith "have a hot hand." Matt Bowen, Mike Silver, Jim Trotter, and Clark Judge react.

Steelers QB Byron Leftwich has fractured ribs and will likely be replaced by Charlie Batch this week; the team will work out several QBs today, including Brian Hoyer and Mike Kafka, and visit with their former WR Plaxico Burress.

The Jags will start Chad Henne against Tennessee after he lit up the Texans in place of Blaine Gabbert.

Broncos reach 10 wins for first time since 2005; Manning does so for tenth straight season; Thomas says shoulder is sore but should be fine; Big Ben to play for Steelers

broncs Look you're clearly not following the point. It's not a reaction to the stats, it's a reaction to the people using the stats, and how they use them.I clearly said we should be more aggressive in general and that's what stats are good at. E.g. general trends. It's people endlessly bringing them up to criticizes a specific decision and rip on a coach that is just annoying. Also please stop explaining the stats we all understand them and their limitations.

Also I didn't call you an arrogant douche, I said that people who didn't think they should approach criticizing Elway, Fox, McCoy, and Manning with a little humility are arrogant douches.

Posted by Fan in Exile on 2012-11-21 09:17:47

Now, there is no doubt that a new bred of bad coaches would emerge. These coaches would certainly misuse and misinterpret statistics, justify bad decisions with worse numbers, and generally make everyone look bad. But honestly, this is nothing that Cincinnati fans are not already familiar with, just with a new, nerdy face.

Posted by broncs on 2012-11-20 23:17:10

BR: Well, so even the most elementary use of statistical analysis (having a dude plug the situation into Burke's calculator) would be immensely helpful in simplifying the coach's decision making process. Yes, that calculator doesn't factor in an injury or defensive scheme automatically, but it can be tweaked to do so (some proprietary evaluation of the success rate would be the easiest way to weight the calculator for a particular scenario). That way the coach has less variables to consider in that 30 second time frame, all with a simplified metric to assist the decision making. During the week long preparation for a game, when scheme, game plan and contingencies are decided upon, why couldn't a dedicated stats team formulate a reasonable success rate assumption based upon the specifics of each week? This is done in nearly every aspect of the game already, why not add in statistical analysis?

And also, why would using statistical analysis take a coach's head and heart out of the game? Since he's using math it makes him care less about success and less aware of on field conditions? That doesn't make much sense to me. Rather, being statistically aware would heighten a coach's awareness of the game while allowing him to rationally and logically make decisions and not fear the conservative backlash of fans and ownership if the (statistically) correct decision were to result in failure (which it inevitably does, just less frequently than the successful outcome). That is to say, coach's are rational, and see that fans/media/owners react poorly to not converting fourth and short, even if it is a statistically sound decision. As such, these coaches will not attempt fourth and short as a misguided effort of self-preservation; if the consensus was based around statistical evaluation, this would not occur.

Posted by broncs on 2012-11-20 23:10:30

broncs: I'd rather a coach has his head and his heart into the game and the small details, than be thinking about the macro probability of going for it leading to winning or losing. Every situation, every team, and every game is different from every other, so why would you use the same macro statistics to make a decision?

Just knowing one detail (like a certain defender has a sore knee, or that J.J Watt is on the opposing team, or your QB hasn't been in sync with the wide receivers, or your running game sucks) changes the odds of success. Of course the score and the time left makes a difference also. A coach looks at all the things that are happening and has to make a decision within 30 seconds.

Posted by billyricky on 2012-11-20 22:35:56

Exile: I think you are having a chicken-and-the-egg logical fallacy here. It's not that stats dictate decision making at the expense of human evaluation, it's that they take all of them into account and provide valuable insight into our evaluation process. The Colts-Patriots example AR brought up is a good one. To me, the two thought processes you described are one and the same. It's not that stats say (or even can say, since stats are all about correct interpretation) "go for it," but rather serve as a mechanism to make the correct evaluation. The "good chance of manning driving" doesn't have to be just a gut feeling, but has a real, known, and quantified statistical likelihood of occurring. Belicheck may have known (we have no way of knowing really what Belicheck was thinking obviously) that the statistical likelihood of converting those two yards was higher than the statistical likelihood of his defense stopping the Colts.

Look, obviously we don't know the percentage chance of conversion without McGahee, since we don't have a sample of games played with this team, without him (any reference to previous iterations of the broncos is inconsequential when dealing with the statistical likelihood of a certain outcome for this specific team). We do, however, know that the win probability is higher after a touchdown than a field goal (wp success=72% for touchdown vs. 60% for the field goal). Now had Fox actually thought, "well, we have less than a 33% chance of converting without McGahee, even though we have peyton manning to make sure we get into the right play and a fullback just as capable as any other to get the 1 yard, and several tight ends we trust to either block or make the catch, and an amazing redzone threat in DT" then sure. Of course, we'll never know, but dollars to donuts says Fox wasn't even close to considering the statistical likehlihood of anything, and just called out the field goal team because that's what he's been doing for his decades long coaching career. As I said, the whole point of looking at win probability, expected points, and other statistical indicators is to get a complete understanding of the decision and its ramifications. As for calling me an arrogant douche, well, that's just rude.BillRicky: The stats Doug was using were not based on randomness or simply the likelihood of picking up the first down. In no way are they misleading if read correctly (as we know, stats can be used to justify or predict anything if manipulated as such). The WP stat is a measure of the probability of a win after the outcome of a certain decision (success or failure of fourth down attempt in this case). So WP shows the net probability of winning, which is the average of the failure and success probabilities. The calculator takes the baseline conversion (success) rate (in this case 68%) and the WP of each outcome (success or failure) and through magic (or math) calculates the break even point (or the point at which the failure rate is too high to warrant the higher WP from a success). The WP indicator certainly accounts for the likelihood of continuing on the drive for a touchdown or the possibility of a turnover on downs. Moreover, the 4th down I am talking about here as the 4th and goal from the one. The Blackjack analogy is apt, even if you are using it incorrectly. Sure counting cards allows you to get a better picture of the true odds of which card will be dealt, but the primary corollary is that there is still a probability (however low) of drawing that face card when the deck is low. That's why in order to count cards and profit, you need a large enough bankroll to account for the inevitable ups and downs. Stats tell a macro story, which is only possible through enough micro transactions to return to the statistical prediction. If you simply flip a coin four times you will not always get a 50/50 split of heads/tails. If you flip that coin 4,000,000 times, you are much more likely to get closer to statistically predicted outcome of 50/50.I don't understand the emotional backlash to employing statistical analysis. I guess it made sense in the election, since the importance of the event being forecasted was so much higher than a simple football game or baseball award. Even so, why does using statistical data in one's decision making process rile people so much?

Posted by broncs on 2012-11-20 21:08:09

I think C) is the most important BY FAR - it's why you pay for a head coach (among other reasons).

So many factors: Denver's been terrible the last few years trying to run on 3rd and short, so especially with McGahee out, they shouldn't try to run. SD has a good defense (7th in the league), and was playing well against the pass - deflecting two passes at the line of scrimmage, one for a pick 6 and the other could have also been intercepted. They were also getting good pressure on Manning - 3 sacks, many hurries. You have to consider these things.

Doug, the statistics you're using are deceiving. You looked at the percentages for picking up the first down, but not the percentages for going on and scoring a touchdown (which are significantly less). And if you know anything about statistics, going for it on 4th down is not a random act. There are factors that skew your chances more in your favor, and factors that skew less in your favor (like the defense you're playing against and the health of your only power running back).

Take blackjack - overall, the odds of winning a hand when hitting on 15 are one number, but if you can count cards and see that there are a large percentage of face cards left in the deck, your odds go down a lot.

Posted by billyricky on 2012-11-20 19:54:09

It may have been Jerry's rule 1st, but it is Ted's now.Discussing Oz on draft day:

"Ted: He has an ugly tattoo on his arm. QBs aren't supposed to have tattoos".

I dunno. Kaepernick violates Ted's rule that your QB should not have tattoos.

Posted by Alaskan on 2012-11-20 18:22:09

E) is a very strong point

Posted by ohiobronco on 2012-11-20 18:18:31

"Well, the whole point of advanced statistics is to take the gut-feeling guesswork out of coaching. So C and D are not applicable."

But advanced stats don't do that, so C and D are applicable. Take the Patriots vs Colts game where Billichick goes for it on 4th and 2. Was his thought process "The stats tell me to do X so I will." Or was it "We are playing Peyton Manning and the Colts, a good offense and a weak defense. If we punt, there is a good chance Manning can march down the field and score. I trust my offense to pick up the first down more than I trust my defense to hold off Manning for 2:30." I'm thinking it was B.

The NFL is littered with the corpses of college coaches that couldn't make it in the NFL. Don't know if Chip Kelly can make the jump or not. But if he can, he'll be the first since Jimmy Johnson.

Posted by A R on 2012-11-20 17:31:12

It was the 2011 draft. The 49ers traded up with the Broncos to get him and the Broncos basically got Rahim Moore, Quinton Carter and Julius Thomas out of the deal if I remember correctly.

Posted by ohiobronco on 2012-11-20 17:30:35

broncs You seem to be under some delusions as far as what advanced statistics can and can't do. So let me ask you this what are the odds that the Broncos are going to convert a 4th and 1 when McGahee has just gone out with injury and the Chargers know that Ball and Hillman aren't a big threat to pick up the first down?

Fyi you can't answer that question and the reality no one can for sure. So honesty makes us say we just don't know. That's why C does apply.

D applies to everyone who isn't an arrogant douche. But mostly in this case some of the people doing the stats need to take a step back.

If you want outside the box thinking look at all the different gameplans that this front office has tried with Orton, Tebow, and now Manning. If anyone deserves a break from being criticized like that they do.

You are right Stats help us savor exactly how bad the Raiders are.

I would love to see Chip Kelly do that, but it wouldn't be the first time a college coach found out that what works in college doesn't work in the NFL.

Posted by Fan in Exile on 2012-11-20 17:16:22

@ Nick - I was with you on that desire to have Kaepernick a Bronco. Wasn't that the 2010 draft? I just checked their roster. Kaepernick has 2 yrs experience.

We will see how he performs in a few more games when the defenses have more game film on him. But he looks like he has the tools and the intelligence to use them wisely.

Posted by BlackKnigh on 2012-11-20 16:48:08

LOL....sometimes the comment threads are better than the articles!

Posted by John Tomasik on 2012-11-20 16:23:58

He went to University of Nevada-Reno, where he was a four year starter (with one Virgil Green being his favorite target most of his career). He ran the Pistol offense under collegiate coaching legend Chris Ault. Colin finished his career at UNR as the only player in D1 history to pass for 10,000 yards and run for 4,000 yards. The concerns about him being more of a runner than passer a la Tebow were way overblown before the draft. The kid is a QB through and through.

As a lifelong Nevadan, I wanted desperately for Denver to grab him last year...

Posted by Nick (ncm42) on 2012-11-20 16:12:31

I suspect Kaepernick got coached up pretty well, so some credit would likely go to Jim Harbaugh, just as Harbaugh seems to be the right coach to get the most out of Alex Smith. But Kaepernick just look so poised in the pocket and never got rattled, even as the Bears start applying more pressure. It's pretty clear the kid has got the talent and the demeanor to be a quality starting QB.

While I would expect Smith will return as the starter once he's cleared to play, the Niners may be thinking about putting Smith on the trade block the coming offseason and moving forward with Kaepernick.

Posted by Bob on 2012-11-20 16:05:10

I'd kick the tires on Tomlinson...

Posted by Joshua Graham on 2012-11-20 15:36:34

Well, the whole point of advanced statistics is to take the gut-feeling guesswork out of coaching. So C and D are not applicable. And frankly, it's thinking like D that serves to galvanize the conservative consensus of NFL coaches and pundits. If the big boys upstairs think it's right, it must be. Some original thinking in disagreement with accepted practice is usually a good thing, if only to spark debate and reevaluation. A would be true, if NFL coaches started taking heed of statistical analyses. B is spot on. Obviously, E is the most important point of this post, and stats only confirm our suspicions. Can't wait for Chip Kelley to be come to the NFL, go for it on tons of fourth downs after only taking 10-15 seconds off the snap count, with 4 or 5 receivers spread wide.

Posted by broncs on 2012-11-20 15:33:58

According to Royal, he's now "on the right side of the rivalry"

Posted by generic internet commentor on 2012-11-20 14:47:43

F) We won.

Posted by John Tomasik on 2012-11-20 14:31:16

When Eddie Royale came out on to the field Sunday, there were a bunch of fans booing him. Maybe I missed something (like Royale saying something to alienate the fans), but why would they boo him? He was loved when he was here. I don't remember him being some sort of bad apple, either. I don't get it.

That Kaepernick performance, at least what I saw of it, was pretty darn amazing. I only watched his first drive then just bits and pieces after, but anytime he was throwing the ball, it was perfect. Where'd that guy come from?

Posted by John Tomasik on 2012-11-20 14:28:12

Don't hold your breath. He looks great, but you should ask his doctors about how the insides of his knees look.

Posted by sadaraine on 2012-11-20 11:27:54

Commenting on my iPhone hasn't worked for some time. It just freezes when I try to post.

Posted by AldenBrown on 2012-11-20 11:27:51

Colin played outstanding but I don't see a reason to make the switch yet. Smith has played pretty well thus far and despite what one announcer said last night, Smith won the playoff game against NO in a shootout.

I think limited tape on Kaepernick and a good game plan led to last nights success. I think the Bears thought they could go blitz happy on Colin early and rattle him. Instead, he made good reads and quick throws. He basically turned the Bears game plan against them. Very impressive, but now the league has game tape on him so this situation is less likely to occur again. Not saying he would fail, cause I don't think he would, but I am sure there are still growing pains to work out.

Posted by RyanHennigan on 2012-11-20 11:25:41

Later in the training room:Matt: I can't play I have a concussionTrainer: No you don'tMatt: (banging head violently against wall) Yes I do

Posted by ohiobronco on 2012-11-20 10:18:16

Pat Kirwan: "Why would the Jets even play Tim Tebow on offense after his two rushes for -5 yards and his one completion for -1 yard?"I've said it before, but I'll say it again - I don't think Tebow will be in the NFL in 2013. Unless maybe the Jags decide he can help sell tickets.

Posted by bradley on 2012-11-20 10:17:43

With Stanzi hiding in a corner with one of those black t-shirts the fans brought over his head... trying hard to not be noticed.

Posted by aLuffabo on 2012-11-20 09:53:43

"All charges against Raiders LB Rolando McClain have been dropped in his Alabama gun case after McClain's accuser $aid he no longer wanted the ca$e pur$ued."

LOL. The world we live in...

Thanks Doug.

Posted by aLuffabo on 2012-11-20 09:50:02

I can't find the link right now but apparently there was a massive bust up yesterday in KC over the starting quarterback. Quinn and Cassel were throwing punches. It all started like this:

Brady: "Matt you're playing QB this weekend"Matt: "Oh no I'm not - you are"Brady: "No you are..."

And so on.

Posted by Mike Birtwistle on 2012-11-20 09:36:11

"to which we'll say that of course there aren't, not when you're kicking field goals instead of allowing Peyton Manning to go for touchdowns in short-yardage situations."

Can we all just agree on some things

A) This horse has been beaten to death.

B) Yes our offense should probably be more aggressive

C) Yes there are many more things to consider than just the stats. e.g. Your starting running back being injured and the other team knowing it.

D) If John Elway, John Fox, Mike McCoy, and Peyton Manning (you know the guys running the offense) are all on the other side then a little humility is probably in order.

E) The Raiders suck

Posted by Fan in Exile on 2012-11-20 09:27:45

I'm not in favor of signing a RB off the street unless Terrell Davis has decided to come back. He's only 4 years older than PFM and he looks pretty fit on TV. Imagine an all-old-guys backfield.

Posted by Alaskan on 2012-11-20 09:15:19

I have not been able to using android.

Posted by Steve Williams on 2012-11-20 08:34:57

btw...is anyone else unable to comment via iphone/ ipad?

Posted by Ralph_W on 2012-11-20 08:31:13

Tainer's article was spot on, unfortunately.

Hillis' fumble was unfortunate, you would think such a blue-collar, hard nosed, lunch-pail bringing player wouldn't put the ball on the ground so much?

Posted by Ralph_W on 2012-11-20 08:29:54

Is Beadles that much better this year, oris he just not being asked to pass-protect for 20sec. every snap?